Is Christianity a Negative Religion?

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

I am asssuming you use the Bible as a book of authority.

Genesis 3

"14 The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all cattle, and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." 16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." 17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return." 20 The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them. 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" -- 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man...."

--> It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.

I would continue my train of thought, but it would take me into a type of discussion you have asked me not to have with you. I stop here.

 

[Caimanson]

--> That, by definition, is not forgiveness. Either all repercussions are wiped out, or they are not. (I have definitely noticed a shift in Christian belief of forgiveness/karma over the years. Even my fundamentalist Christian dentist told me he believes in karma. I thought to myself, "We are making progress!")

How would you forgive/discipline a child?
The way I understand it, forgiveness is at a relationship level: I am at peace with god but I still have to clean my mess.
Does Karma have that relationship level with the creator?

"For example, if you abuse your family god may forgive you, but you and your family still have to live with the consequences of your actions."

--> This is an interesting mix of forgiveness and responsibility. It also begs the question: what about people who do bad things and get off scott free? The example that keeps coming back to me is the mall-shooters and school-shooters who kill, then turn their gun on themselves, and kill themselves. If, at that last second they repent, they are off "scott-free", and they do not have live with the consequences of their killings either, as you suggest. (Fortunately for me, my belief system teaches quite a different end to the story.)

I wouldn't dare to elaborate on the theological details of such last second repentance.
Though for starters, the shooter is now dead. That is bad enough in my eyes.

 

[taijasi]

This reminds me of a question I have. In Theosophy is every person born with a karmic debt left over from a previous life?

Yes. Not only that, it is suggested that any given individual's accumulated karma from the earliest few hundred, or thousands of incarnations ... would easily constituted an insurmountable obstacle to spiritual enlightenment, if it were not for certain mitigating factors. The easiest way to think about it, is to imagine that each of us has something like a spiritual counselor, or arbitrator, whom and which seeks to "work things out" so that we may pay our debt, while still managing to advanced forward on the path toward our ultimate goal.

But some important factors overshadow, or underscore, anything we say about karma. It is assumed, as Nick points out, that our original going forth from the Garden of Eden (as a symbolic state, or condition), was God's direct Will, or instruction. It may be thought of as the advice of a loving Father - a purely Spiritual Being of inestimable Wisdom and infinite Love, as well as a Power that He Himself attained only by demonstrating His own mastery in the lower worlds in previous evolutionary cycles.

The Spiritual "us" which goes forth, the Genesis Humanity pre the donning of "coats of skin," is a Spark of God, a `Monad,' and as such is of the same Eternal Essence as the God that sent us forth. This is how we understand the "created us in His own image" bit.

And the first several cycles of development, which the Monad undergoes, concern its descent "downward" from the worlds of Spirit, into the worlds of matter, until finally the lowest point of the material evolutionary cycle is reached. The Monad incarnates via the mineral kingdom, and for untold eons, the Consciousness principle - or `soul' - slowly starts to develop.

Theosophists speak of the Monad as "sleeping" through these stages of Consciousness development, because there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the strictly material worlds which can stir the awareness, or the pure spiritual Being, of the Monad itself. And the journey of the Monad is through the vegetable kingdom, animal kingdom, and finally, entering into the human kingdom, the Consciousness Princple, or `Soul,' becomes "Individualized."

(Previously, an entire forest might be ensouled by a monad, or a flock of birds will be spoken of as the incarnation of the `group soul.' Humanity is where there is finally a one-to-one relationship between the form we see in the mirror, and the Parent Monad in Highest Heaven. In between, in worlds that are still transcendent of our everyday consciousness, the Soul mediates, serving as the bridge between our outward, consciousness-in-form, and the innermost, trancendent Beingness of pure Spirit.)

The karma that we can think of as being held over from our earliest, brutish, animal-like incarnations (involving plenty of killing, crime, and the wronging of our brothers in all kingdoms of life) ... must be dealt with at some point, before we are fully enlightened. It isn't looked at as an inconvenience, or unfortunate side effect of God's instruction to us to go forth, incarnate into form, and experience life in the material world(s). Rather, karma is thought of as how we learn our lessons.


Theosophists understand life, in all worlds of being, as operating according to the Hermetic Axiom:

As it is Above so it is below;
As it is Within so it is without;
As in the Great so in the small;
There but one Life and one Law.
​

Therefore, as we look around, and see what we - and the rest of Humanity are going through - this too, God Himself is going through (and fellow `Gods') ... just on a much, much grander scale. Thus Theosophists speak of the Planetary Logoi, of which Earth is but one, as plural Beings - in each of Whom a respective "Humanity" lives, and moves, and has its Being. So, too, with other kingdoms, since these kingdoms of life, on Planet Earth, are all part of God, and constitute important components - or organs - of His body of expression.


This is pantheistic, of course, although that's just the tip of the iceberg. Alexander Pope expresses it beautifully:

All are but parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body Nature, is and God the soul.
​

Even the Planetary Logoi, Theosophically, are like the major and minor centers, or chakras, of the Solar Logos - GOD. The Mayans, the Egyptians, the cult of Sol Invictus ... not every ancient culture bowed down in reverence to a great, ball of fire. The Hindu prayer, the Gayatri, expresses it thus:

O Thou, Who givest sustenance to the Universe,
From Whom all things proceed,
To Whom all things return,
Reveal to us the face of the true, Spiritual Sun,
Hidden by a disc of Golden Light,
That we may know the Truth and do our whole Duty,
As we journey to Thy Sacred feet.
​

So, even God(s) have karma. It's just on a far grander scale than human karma. And speaking of strictly human karma, which concerns our non-mastery of life in the mental, emotional and physical worlds (and a life dedicated to Service based upon this mastery) ... an Initiate of the Third Degree can be said to be largely free of almost all personal debt.

What remains for an advanced Initiate is group karma, and the shared karma of race, nation, and Humanity as a whole. These are all accepted voluntarily, and willingly, from one point of view, yet the Enlightenment of a Full Buddha cannot be attained until one's Dharma has expanded to include such a scope. Therefore from a greater point of view, our karma does not end, even with "Self-Mastery."

As for the earlier stages of the Initiatiory Path, or the Path of Discipleship (including the Path of Purity, and of `Probationary Discipleship') ... the disciple is asked to take upon him or herself as much of the old debt as can be reasonably and feasibly shouldered - so that rapid progress may be made, and greater Service rendered to the race. This is part of why the Path is so difficult. It is a great hastening process. And even the heaviest of karmic burdens can be burned away in a few short lives of dedicated self-sacrifice.

The best book I've ever read about rebirth, authored by Melanie Mills under the pseudonym H.K. Challoner, is `Wheel of Rebirth.' I recommmend it for an excellent firsthand account of a disciple, working under the tutelage of her Master, to balance some of the darkest karma that any of us could possibly imagine. Her story is useful because it represents the extreme, and illustrates what we are all capable of, while for most of us the journey should not be quite so difficult.

Namaskar

 

[lunamoth]

Luna,

I am asssuming you use the Bible as a book of authority.

Authority? That's not my relationship with my Lord.

I don't indulge in Bibliolatry.

My religion is informed by scritpure, tradition and reason. My faith is informed by experience of and the love of God.

Genesis 3

"14 The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all cattle, and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." 16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." 17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return." 20 The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them. 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" -- 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man...."

--> It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.

I have never heard original sin described this way. I certainly reject that idea.

 

[taijasi]

As for a more direct response the the question, or idea, of whether or not original sin could possibly exist in the mind, spirit, aura of a newborn child, I recommend a book called `The Personal Aura,' by Dora van Gelder Kunz. Dora was a trained clairvoyant and a Theosophist, yet she speaks with a simplicity, and eschews most of the Sanskrit terminology which is so often present in Theosophical writings.

This particular book, available from Amazon.com, is a recent work ... and includes several illustrations of the astral body, or the aura of the emotional body. She worked very closely with an extremely gifted artist to produce something of immense practical value, and she provides explanations of what has been depicted - so that we can understand what we are looking at.

The part I wanted to call attention to in particular, is what has been called `karmic indicators,' and these do show up even in the aura of a newborn baby. She describes how these can be thought of as latent tendencies, or potentials, although they are not so much abilites, or personal qualities, as the actual `mechanism' by which karma works itself out, in the life of the individual ... as we evolve over time.

The aura itself, including the body (brain, physical consciousness, etc.), of a newborn baby, can thus be considered a tabula rasa, and to see a baby smile we must surely realize that there is an innocence there which no former incarnation of that soul could tarnish. Yet if there is indeed, a reincarnating Soul present, then there must be a mechanism for karma. We can beg the question, yes, but I find Dora's book, and the drawings, quite revealing ... as a reincarnationist, and as a student of human nature.

Namaskar

 

[LeoSalinas22]

Authority? That's not my relationship with my Lord.

I don't indulge in Bibliolatry.

My religion is informed by scritpure, tradition and reason. My faith is informed by experience of and the love of God.


I have never heard original sin described this way. I certainly reject that idea.

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

 

[lunamoth]

Doing a bit of online research into Original Sin, this wiki article illustrates the diversity of Christian views regarding original sin. It is far from what could be considered a 'fundamental Christian doctrine.'

"There are wide-ranging disagreements among Christian groups as to the exact understanding of the doctrine about a state of sinfulness or absence of holiness affecting all human beings, even children, with some Christian groups denying it altogether."

And a sum re the Catholic view: "Human nature, without being entirely corrupted, has been harmed in its natural powers, is subject to ignorance, suffering and the power of death, and has a tendency to sin. This tendency is called concupiscence" (Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 77), but is distinct from original sin itself."

and

In this way, the Church argues that original sin is not imputing the sin of the father to the son; rather, it is simply the inheritance of a wounded nature from the father, which is an unavoidable part of reproduction.

 

[Faithfulservant]

Personally.. I dont think its negative... Christianity is the only belief system that doesnt require works for salvation. But...Im biased

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Caimanson,

You Asked,

"How would you forgive/discipline a child?"

--> I am not sure what you are asking. Are you asking when I would forgive a child, and when I would discipline a child?

"The way I understand it, forgiveness is at a relationship level: I am at peace with god but I still have to clean my mess."

--> I agree with the peace and clean-my-mess parts.

"Does Karma have that relationship level with the creator?"

--> Forgiveness, no. Peace and clean-my-mess parts, yes.

"I wouldn't dare to elaborate on the theological details of such last second repentance."

--> I, on the other hand, enjoy such elaborations.

"Though for starters, the shooter is now dead. That is bad enough in my eyes."

--> In my eyes, his problems are only starting.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

You said,

"Original Sin ... is far from what could be considered a 'fundamental Christian doctrine.' "

--> I think what people are saying is, some pronouncements by God have a certain negativity about them. For example, in the story of Adam and Eve, Eve now has to suffer through previously unnecessary child-bearing pain for what she has done. Adam must now walk on ground that was previously un-cursed (I am not sure what that means, but it does not sound good). Clearly, in the Christian version of the story, we must spend all of our time on Earth with these (and other) Divine punishments to deal with. (Fortunately, the Theosophical version of the same story contains none of these punishments.)

These Divine pronouncements have a certain negativity about them. It is the negativity I am talking about, not necessarily whether they are given an official title such as Original Sin.

Leo's quote,

"Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

says we (even babies) have all sinned, and additionally, we have all been born in sin. I believe this is getting close to a universal Christian idea of Original Sin.

 

[lunamoth]

Luna,

You said,

"Original Sin ... is far from what could be considered a 'fundamental Christian doctrine.' "

--> I think what people are saying is, some pronouncements by God have a certain negativity about them. For example, in the story of Adam and Eve, Eve now has to suffer through previously unnecessary child-bearing pain for what she has done. Adam must now walk on ground that was previously un-cursed (I am not sure what that means, but it does not sound good). Clearly, in the Christian version of the story, we must spend all of our time on Earth with these (and other) Divine punishments to deal with. (Fortunately, the Theosophical version of the same story contains none of these punishments.)

These Divine pronouncements have a certain negativity about them. It is the negativity I am talking about, not necessarily whether they are given an official title such as Original Sin.

Gotcha, thank you for clarifying. I'd say yes, there are tons of things in the Bible that I'd call negative, esp in the Old testament but also in the New.

Leo's quote,

"Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

says we (even babies) have all sinned, and additionally, we have all been born in sin. I believe this is getting close to a universal Christian idea of Original Sin.

As I said, different Christians approach interpretation of the Bible in different ways. I don't think there is a universal Christian idea of Original Sin.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

I hope this discussion has helped you understand your religion better. And, I hope it has helped you understand better how we non-Christians view Christianity.

 

[Thomas]

I don't think there is a universal Christian idea of Original Sin.

Hi Lunamoth – you're right, the different denominations tend to view the question differently, and in different ways.

If one was looking for universal agreement among Christians, then I would suggest the idea of 'privation' is a better place to start – less subjective and therefore less prone to the sentimental. The notion of sin has become so distorted in a culture that idolises the ego that it is rarely discussed with the philosophical detachment required to do the subject justice.

At the heart lies the paradox:
If God is good,
and God made the world,
and the world is good,
why is there bad in the world?
And what can (if anything) I do to redress it?

Whilst the world seems thoroughly briefed on the notion of sin, the world is not so thoroughly briefed on the idea that above all other traditions, Christianity holds that the world, and man, is good, and can co-operate with God towards his own salvation and the salvation of the Cosmos.

That is one of the principle reasons why I hold Christianity as the most positive of religions, and one of the reasons why I returned after thirty years searching.

The BIG PROBLEM is that it requires us to put our neighbour before ourselves. Try selling that idea in the affluent west...

Thomas

 

[bananabrain]

ahem -

Theosophy takes a different approach. We say the Bible has been re-written, and wrongly translated into English. The actual story is in there somewhere. It is our job to find that true story. (And, getting to the true story, after being denied it for years, is fun!)

i feel i should point out that if you are suggesting that the Torah (the first 5 books of the "bible") has been "re-written", you ought really to provide some kind of evidence. as it is, this is firstly a "sez you" and secondly an implied criticism of the religion that considers itself the custodian, for several thousand years, of every letter, vowel and crown of this Text, namely judaism. i challenge you to give me ONE example of just ONE verse from Torah that has been, as you put it, "re-written"; this should include an example of what it should be "re-written" to say (in what language, i wonder?) and some evidence as to why the Torah verse is incorrec tand the "re-written" version is correct. until you do so, this is nothing but a smear - and a pretty shoddy one to boot.

It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.

it is clear that you are ignorant of the purpose, function, context, implication or plain meaning of this passage.

(Previously, an entire forest might be ensouled by a monad, or a flock of birds will be spoken of as the incarnation of the `group soul.' Humanity is where there is finally a one-to-one relationship between the form we see in the mirror, and the Parent Monad in Highest Heaven. In between, in worlds that are still transcendent of our everyday consciousness, the Soul mediates, serving as the bridge between our outward, consciousness-in-form, and the innermost, trancendent Beingness of pure Spirit.)

what on earth does all of this mean in english? deary me.

as for this:

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

this is not a general indictment of humanity in any way shape or form. judaism does not accept "original sin", nor does it accept that children (especially babies) are wholly responsible for their actions in this life, let alone previous transmigrations.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Dondi]

It is this cursing of humans, placing of emnity, multiplying of pain as punishment, and the cursing of the ground that is referred to as Original Sin.
it is clear that you are ignorant of the purpose, function, context, implication or plain meaning of this passage.

it is clear that you are ignorant of the purpose, function, context, implication or plain meaning of this passage.

How would you interpret this passage, BB?

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

this is not a general indictment of humanity in any way shape or form. judaism does not accept "original sin", nor does it accept that children (especially babies) are wholly responsible for their actions in this life, let alone previous transmigrations.

BB, but would you say that man is in some kind of fallen state, that is, there is something amiss at the core of humans that needs to be righted?

 

[bananabrain]

How would you interpret this passage, BB?

well, for a start i'd do a search on CR for the words "ma'aseh bereishit". i've posted on this a number of times - here's a good place to look:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/garden-of-eden-2328.html?highlight=ma'aseh+bereishit

http://www.comparative-religion.com...n-story-5294.html?highlight=ma'aseh+bereishit

but would you say that man is in some kind of fallen state, that is, there is something amiss at the core of humans that needs to be righted?

well, i'd say the world isn't right and that is the task of humans, to put it right. it's called "tiqqun" (or tikkun if you like), "repair". we would argue that the edenic state is not really a human state as we would understand it and that the greatest transformation we can hope for is the onset of the messianic age - but it is our task to bring that to fruition, not to hope for someone else to sort it out for us. we're not expecting humans to be substantially different in any way that can't be achieved personally through correct living by Torah and worship of G!D. we just don't see it as quite so awful as those who believe in original sin - because we don't really believe it was a sin in the same way that humans can sin nowadays. what it was was the beginning of the *possibility* of sin - but also the beginning of the possibility of *repentance*; the beginning of choice, for which the necessary concomitant was human free-will, the knowledge of good and evil in order to choose freely to do one or the other.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Bananabrain,

You said,

"...this is nothing but a smear - and a pretty shoddy one to boot."

-->

All of my religious discussions are based on the idea of open exchange of comparatve-religion, and the idea the we can find what we have in common. My ultimate goal is to for us to find what we have in common, not where we differ.

As you have stated, you see my words as nothing as a shoddy smear. I respect your evaluation of my ideas, and I vigorously defend your right to have your opinion, no matter what.

However, since you see my words as nothing as a shoddy smear, I will respond with the only response I am allowed — thank you for a chance to practice my compassion.

I wish you well on your path back to the Garden. I am confident we will meet again there, and, when that day comes, we will shake hands as friends.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

The software will not allow me to correct typos.

the idea the we --> the idea that we

nothing as a --> nothing but a

 

[lunamoth]

Luna,

I hope this discussion has helped you understand your religion better. And, I hope it has helped you understand better how we non-Christians view Christianity.

I've found the discussion interesting and hopeful...I apologize if something I've said has put you off continuing the discussion. I just can't help but to point out that not all Christians take the same kind of interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Luna,

I am not ending the discussion. I am only commending you for your openness to have this discussion, and to have continued it this far.

It does seem we have covered the topic of Original Sin thoroughly, although I am willing to hear any more observations and questions you may have.

There are also other topics I have already recommended.